Opinion
PROCEEDINGS: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION
Honorable BEVERLY REID O'CONNELL, United States District Judge.
A federal court must determine its own jurisdiction even if there is no objection to it. Rains v. Criterion Sys., Inc ., 80 F.3d 339, 342 (9th Cir. 1996). This is because federal courts are of limited jurisdiction and " possess only that power authorized by [the] Constitution and [federal] statute." See Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am ., 511 U.S. 375, 377, 114 S.Ct. 1673, 128 L.Ed.2d 391 (1994). Original jurisdiction may be established pursuant to the diversity statute, which requires that the parties be citizens of different states and that the amount in controversy exceed $75,000, exclusive of costs and interest. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1). Under the complete diversity rule, each plaintiff must be diverse from each defendant. See Newman-Green, Inc. v. Alfonzo-Larrain, 490 U.S. 826, 829, 109 S.Ct. 2218, 104 L.Ed.2d 893 (1989) (citing Strawbridge v. Curtiss, 7 U.S. 267, 3 Cranch 267, 2 L.Ed. 435 (1806)). For diversity jurisdiction purposes, a corporation is deemed a citizen of any state in which it is incorporated, as well as the state where it has its principal place of business. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1).
Plaintiff James River Insurance Company (" Plaintiff") initiated this action on June 5, 2015 and invokes this Court's diversity jurisdiction. (Dkt. No. 1.) Plaintiff's allegations are insufficient to demonstrate complete diversity, as Plaintiff, a corporation, has not alleged its principal place of business. (Compl. ¶ 3.) Additionally, Plaintiff fails to specify an amount in controversy. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS Plaintiff to show cause as to why this case should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Plaintiff's response to this Order shall be filed by no later than Friday, June 19, 2015.
IT IS SO ORDERED.